Pro Sports and Cannabis, Part 1

Cannabis, as it is legalized for many medical conditions, has been changing the treatment of many disorders.

I believe that recent discoveries about the cannabis family will change the face of pro sports as well.

One branch of that family is the recent ability to extract a specific class of substances derived from the hemp plant, the fertilized cousin of marijuana.

That branch isn't smoked. It's ingested orally or used topically, on the skin. It's safe, and it's legal in all 50 states.

The extract that I’m referring to makes up about 40% of the plant’s total extracted volume. It’s called CBD, which is short for cannabidiol.

We’ve been hearing more and more about the ‘open access’ approach to pill abuse in the NFL. It’s long been a problem in football and other sports.

CBD provides a safer method for managing pain and extending careers.

In this two-part series, let's explore how that's possible.

What’s that?

Let’s define some terms. First, what’s THC? It’s the part of the hemp/cannabis plant that provides the euphoric state. That's what most recreational users are looking for. Modern botany has increased the amount of THC from about 3-5% in the 1960s to as much as 28% now. The 28% plant recently won a contest to see who could grow the strongest pot; 15-21% is more common in medical cannabis (also MMJ).

THC fits into a site called the C-1 receptor in the cerebral cortex of the brain, and it does have some medical benefits. That connection provides the ‘high’ that some users like.

What is CBD? As I mentioned, it’s the substance that makes up 40% of the total extraction you can get from the hemp plant. Hemp, by the way, is cannabis that has let the male plants fertilize the females. Since female and male plants aren’t separated, not much THC grows in hemp fields.

To gain a higher production of THC is simple - you take away the male plants. The females can’t be pollinated, so they produce lots of THC in a resinous form as a result.

The plants used for hemp oil and CBD now have less than 1% THC. The plants used for CBD and/or hemp oil meet the international standard, which is 1% THC. CBD is currently believed to have the most uses of the over 60 substances that make up cannabis. It’s legal, available by mail, and comes in liquid form. THC does have medical value as well, as any pain patient can tell you, but there’s a better option for many users.

So, to be clear: CBD intensive plants are only used for medical purposes. They have a specific difference from other forms of marijuana/hemp. CBD is what is most likely to get you better when it is properly prepared and used. It fits into the C-2 receptor in the brain, which has a multitude of beneficial physical effects. They include functioning as an anti-inflammatory, analgesic (pain relief), and antispasmodic effects.

Cannabis continues to draw debate about its usage and legality. Polls often show that 80% of the public is in favor of medical marijuana. Yet, we've been fighting an entrenched battle against stupidity and ignorance. It's being fought against highly vocal, well-meaning, but misguided people. They believe that cannabis is a deadly, addictive plant.

Those naysayers ignore the more than 20,000 articles published in peer reviewed journals that show its medical efficacy. It has an unusually low level of toxicity. In the last 6,000 years, it hasn’t killed anyone via overdose.

I mentioned the term receptor, which means precisely what it sounds like. A receptor is an area that receives a certain substance. Cannabis has no ability to be addictive, because the needed receptors aren't there. It can be habit forming, if a person gets used to using it daily.

But there’s a big medical difference between a substance being habit forming versus it being addictive. When something is addictive, there is a receptor it fits into. Filling that receptor creates addiction. You don’t find that problem with CBD - it is not habit forming in any way.

In more good news, the House passed a bill on May 29, banning the DEA from interfering with state policies on cannabis. The Senate may follow suit, and if President Obama signs it, as expected, a big part of our problems getting effective medications to patients in need will vanish. It’s overdue. More states are putting medical marijuana statutes on the ballot or in place every year.

Cannabis and Medication in Pro Sports

The connection between medications and professional sports isn’t new. The NBA doesn’t test for THC during the offseason. In retirement, many players have admitted they smoked cannabis to lengthen their careers. One of its effects is helping reduce the inflammation and spasms caused by running up and down hardwood floors. I’m sure that some players also used it for recreation but it benefits both the players and the league.

The medical need that cannabis filled is still there. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (called NSAIDs), including ibuprofen and similar prescription or over the counter medications (ie Advil and Tylenol), can create havoc with the liver and kidneys. CBD won’t. It’s cost effective and of low toxicity.

Aspirin kills over 1,000 people each, every year. CBD or cannabis? Zero deaths in the last 6,000 years.

Full Disclosure

I have a personal interest in this topic: I have a genetic neurological disorder. It causes fatigue, insomnia, and violent pain flares that can last up to a month. There are times when I don’t sleep for as many as four days at a time due to this.

A cure is not expected anytime soon. At times, the pain is overwhelming.

There is no question in my mind that taking CBD over the past ten-plus weeks has helped me noticeably.

I also use medical cannabis. I’ve substituted CBD when, recently, it’s been possible. The CBD is best when taken daily over a longer period of time. If used that way, cannabis patients develop a resistance. With CBD, they don’t. For daily use, to control the frequency and severity of the problem, I used two drops, three times per day.

That’s now down to one drop, three times daily, and the improvement continues to increase. At other times, high THC medical cannabis has helped more with the most severe pain flares.

As far as my own results with it, the lady I live with came in to check on me an hour after I took CBD for the first time. She couldn’t believe the difference in my level of relaxation and the change in the muscles of my face. I hadn't told her that I was starting the experiment with CBD, but the change was obvious to her. From my standpoint, the improvement was from just being out of pain.

Getting on CBD has substantially reduced my level of discomfort. It allows me to diminish the strength and dosage of the more toxic medications I’ve had to use in the past. I have friends who’ve also used it for sports pain, joint and soft tissue pain, also with good results.

It is not a performance enhancing substance, except in the sense that having less pain, inflammation, and spasms is beneficial to the athlete.

Epilepsy, MS and Cerebral Palsy

I’ve seen a video of CBD oil helping with a form of childhood epilepsy call Dravet syndrome. The first use of CBD for Dravet's syndrome was given to a patient who was having 300 seizures a week:

The form of epilepsy in that video usually kills the child.

I’ve seen nearly identical videos of patients with MS...

...and amazing results with it treating Cerebral Palsy:

In such cases, there’s room for both approaches, MMJ and CBD.

Older people usually inhale cannabis from a vaporizer. It’s impressive to watch the patients’ symptoms just vanishing after a few inhalations. There is nothing like it in the Western pharmacopoeia. And, it’s relatively inexpensive. CBD will also help many of these cases until we have a rational national policy on MMJ. The pharmaceutical industry does NOT like where this is going.

CBD and Modern Professional Sports

In athletics, CBD can reduce or even resolve issues such as muscle spasms, inflammation, and physical pain. This is a safe product. Unlike a lot of injections and oral medications I’ve been through, I don’t go numb while using it. Nothing changes in my consciousness. I simply have less pain. That can be a great gift, in sports and in life.

CBD can provide faster healing times and less post-game discomfort for athletes. Having no hassles with the league urinalysis is a realistic concern. I’m sure that team physicians will be comfortable using CBD at some point. The research is becoming overwhelming, but getting doctors educated is a slow process.

The biggest problem with CBD is that few pain management doctors know anything about it, and many don’t care.

They should.

It’s among the new opportunities in the management of pain. Pain and inflammation reduce physical function. That cycle gets worse as the season (or the athlete’s life) moves on. Why live with more pain than necessary?

Everything goes in cycles. The government once created Prohibition of cannabis, declaring that it had no medical usage. We’ve gone from the NBA outlawing urine tests for cannabis in the offseason to the outlawing of THC year-round in the NFL. Now we’re coming back around again, by extracting a powerful medical option that’s legal from hemp plants. Many researchers and growers have struggled for decades to create this hybrid. Because of them, we can provide these same benefits to players all year.

It’s the strongest substance within the cannabis plant for healing a wide range of disorders. Other disorders will respond to other parts of the plant extract. That research is ongoing. UC San Diego Health Sciences Center was recently given the first federal license to grow, research and prescribe medical cannabis.

I had an appointment recently with one of the pain management professors at that facility, and I talked to him about CBD. He’s the guy who handles my spinal procedures, and he’s completely focused on the patient’s health and comfort. He was interested, open, knew the biochemistry, and was interested in both the source material on them and my own experience.

As a full professor, he can spread this information to many students. He seems open to anything that will help the patient. His office has recommended to me the use of CBD or THC to avoid opioid use.

That’s a perspective that’s missing with some doctors. Opioids are brutal drugs - the side effects are nearly as bad as the conditions they're taken for, and deaths from them are common.

Helping Players Safely

I’d like to see players using this completely legal tool to heal faster and stay better. There aren’t any known metabolites that violate the NFL strictures, as far as I’ve been able to discern. I’m not an expert or a trusting soul in this area; I’d want to see an NFL ruling on CBD use soon, so that players can get on with using it.

Given the variances in Roger Goodell’s rulings, the players need clear permission. It should be so clear that no problems arise later.

A lot of things that are legal, the NFL still bans. Consistency has not been the league’s watchword. Even many of the owners have become leery of Goodell’s demand that he and he alone should handle discipline issues. He’s been erratic to the point of idiocy in that area. I shudder to think that he could make policy on CBD.

I want the players to look forward to having longer careers with less discomfort. It’s an advantage that they can’t afford to ignore. If one team doesn’t use it, another team will. The players will talk about it among themselves. Word will get around of its efficacy. That may be the fastest and best approach to force the league to take a stand on it.

This is a brand new weapon within an ancient approach for healing. It could help the Broncos deal with injuries and pain as much as it has done so with me.

I hope the NFL will rule on whether it’s legal, and soon. They should welcome it. Legislating it should be like legislating aspirin. Except, over 1000 people a year die from aspirin (salicylic acid) reactions, although as mentioned, that number is often combined with NSAID deaths, to a total of 7,600 people. The latest number of people who die from alcohol in a year is over 110,000 (Ibid). No one’s ever died from CBD.

However, I think you need to do some more research on the specific mechanisms of action and mechanisms of tolerance and dependency. Others are correct in pointing out your explanations are not correct. For many compounds these effects are complex and not fully understood, so it's understandable. But flatly stating these compounds have no risk of dependency is not correct. Your molecular explanations are overly simplistic and misleading.

Also, keep in mind the peer-reviewed literature contains a shocking amount of misinformation and junk science. This is true no matter what field you're in or what your position is. It can be difficult as a layman to wade through all the crap that is published, especially with many articles hidden behind paywalls. When evaluating a publication, check the impact factor of the journal. While not a perfect metric, this at least gives an idea of the stringency of the peer review. The higher the impact factor, the more trustworthy the data (in general). Anything less than 4 or 5 can pretty safely be ignored completely.

Posted by skithebert on 2014-07-13 16:32:18

Best of luck on that, Matt. I hope it gives you some relief

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-12 15:53:39

A belated comment to say this was above your usual high standards. Very informative. I am going to have to do some more research into CBD as I have a couple different conditions that could qualify for MMJ in other states, but currently don't in NJ. I will have to looking into whether CBD could help.

Posted by MattR on 2014-07-11 00:41:42

Thanks Doc. I really appreciate your time and you sharing your knowledge with us.

Posted by sadaraine on 2014-07-10 23:38:01

I'm honored. Thank you

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-10 17:44:27

Exactly

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-10 17:31:41

So there are receptors in the brain that specifically tie into "addiction" and they don't include the C1 and C2 receptor?

Posted by sadaraine on 2014-07-10 16:33:45

Thanks, Kell.

This is an important point, and I believe that it's dealt with in Part II, which is a bit more technical (Note to Hans - when you haven't read Part II and the title says Part I, read the first carefully and then recognize that other issues will be dealt with in the second article). The US, including NIVA, has repeatedly refused to fund any research that MIGHT indicate any medical benefits from cannabis, specifically. The Depart. of H+HS has also been complicit. The issues around CBD are separate, yet many lawmakers want to substitute that for treatment with MMJ. Unfortunately, people respond differently to the two substances in many cases (which is why I use both, although my use of THC has gone down substantially, along with the use of other medications).

I bring this up because PTSD is one of the over 200 diseases and disorders that respond well to cannabis, as peer-reviewed research has in the past, already proven. Hence, the research that Dr. Sisley did, as described in the article Kell linked is in part a follow-up, meant to prove that earlier research was reproducible, as well as adding a key area of her own - specifically, that cannabis should not be a Schedule 1 medication, which would continue the farce of saying that it has no medical value. Her willingness to challenge that is laudable.

Unfortunately, there are multiple legal and research forces in AZ that are somewhere right wing of Attila the Hun. That's how she lost her grant and her job. It's outrageous behavior. Here in San Diego we have a large population of PTSD patients who have returned from the war. One was arrested not once, but twice, for cultivating cannabis under

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-10 16:16:54

It's embarrassing that Dr. Gupta, CNN's former medical go-to guy, has apologized to the public for misleading them on the benefits and supposed dangers of cannabis, yet this kind of nonsense continues to show up on CNN. Thanks for passing it on - this is the kind of thing that I continue to fight with facts and research study results.

There is no scientific basis for many of these claims and Dr. Gupta came to realize that. Since no researcher I've ever met has proposed giving cannabis to children except in extreme medical situations (nor has any cannabis proponent I've run into), no study has actually shown that children would become addicted. As I've stated - they're missing the difference between addiction and habituation.

Research has also shown that the best way to keep cannabis from children is to licence and regulate it. Without those steps, we know that children in HS can get cannabis more easily than tobacco or alcohol, both of which are toxic, dangerous and have caused a lot of fatalities - over 435,000 deaths last year from tobacco, and over 100,000 from alcohol, as we'll deal with in Part II.

But even if you accept the statement that his call center got 126 calls about adverse reactions to cannabis, which is hardly a huge number, how does that relate in terms of the total number of usages of cannabis during 2013 in his area of Colorado? It's miniscule. He goes on to say that deaths have been attributed to ingesting marijuana cookies and food items. No one's been able to show that in research anywhere in the world. You can say whatever you want, but I operate off of research and I can't find a supportive basis for such a statement anywhere. If it can be proven, I'll change my perspective. As Doc P points out, he's never seen such a case. Neither have I.

You can take too much in the way of edibles, and that's the main reason that people become frightened. That's something I did deal with in clinic, although the patient was fine in a few hours and all I received was a couple of phone calls, including the one telling me that the patient was doing fine. There are negative symptoms involved and they can scare people (although I've yet to see 'hallucinations').

However - even the RMPDC, which has it's own ax to grind, didn't mention a single death, or even any stats on emergency room visits. No death from an overdose of cannabis has ever been reported to date. Deaths from stupid behavior have always been with us, but even if you believe the anecdotal statements provided, you're talking about a drop in the bucket compared to alcohol and pills.

There's been a huge uptick in the articles claiming dire consequences, but it remains impossible to prove most of the claims. The article on 'driving deaths' simply tested for cannabis in the drivers' systems. That could have equally easily been from using cannabis a week before, since it stays in the system for up to a month. There's no test for how recent the use was, and the article doesn't in any way show that cannabis was directly involved. Doc P sent me a comment on such an article that went on about the involvement of cannabis in one accident. The driver was under the influence of alcohol and pills were involved, but that was ignored. The only discussion was that at some point which wasn't determined, the driver had used cannabis. It's a continuing witch hunt. It lacks actual facts.

It's a long way from proof of anything, other than the obvious reality that people shouldn't take large doses of anything unless under a doctors care and no one should drive while under the influence of any substance. I've stated above that I'm opposed to driving which under the influence of cannabis. I'd add painkillers, other narcotics and alcohol. I noticed that there was no comment on whether opioids or alcohol were present in these drivers, and that's an essential aspect of doing such research. Until it's been cleaned up and meets basic standards, I don't pay a lot of attention to it because the conclusions given cannot be supported by the facts rendered.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-10 16:16:47

As the other two responses here indicate, Hans, I do my research reasonably well, and the point you are addressing was handled early in the article.

I know that it's a long piece, and it's easy to miss something within such an article. No worries. However - you're going overboard with your language. It sounds less like a desire to clarify a reasonable point, and more like you're looking for a chance to attack the author.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-10 15:29:07

I hope that the above comment clarified that - there are many receptors that are associated with different substances that are addictive. Each plays it's own role. Many play more than one role, but equally, many deal with addiction.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-10 15:24:00

Certainly. There are a vast number of receptors within the human brain. The C-1 and C-2 are in the cerebral cortex area of the brain. They deal with hemp/cannabis. There are, to be more thorough, several more that fit into other molecules that are within the hemp.cannabis plant in various areas. I'll touch on them in Part II.

But this is a small number of receptors, and there are many more. They include one that fits opioids and affects breathing. An overdose of an opioid (any drug originally derived from opium) will overload that receptor and stop the patient's breath, killing them. This is only one, and the list is far too long for our purposes here.

There's a specific sentence from the article that I think Doc could clarify: "When something is addictive, there is a receptor it fits into. Filling that receptor creates addiction." Doc, I take this to mean that their is another receptor (not named C-1 or C-2) where addictive substances fit. Is it a certain receptor that corresponds with a certain addictive substance, or is there a single receptor that is associated with addiction in general?

Posted by Jake Hoban on 2014-07-10 13:01:50

Hey Doc, wanted to make sure you didn't miss this recent story about sabotaged PTSD research:

The 'hemp' plant and the 'marijuana' plant are one in the same and not cousins. Please do your research Doc, cannabis is cannabis. Using the word marijuana reeks of ignorance and/or submission to the tenets of reefer madness, and so please do research and resist the terminology of the naked finks who would be kings of you.

Posted by Hans Olo on 2014-07-10 10:12:00

First off, thank you for sharing Doc. I'm a more informed man because of reading your articles over the years.

I would like to ask a clarifying question since I'm a computer guy and not a doctor: In your article you spoke about both components fitting into a receptor (C-1 and C-2 respectively). But then when talking about addiction you said that they don't fit into receptors. Can you expound on this to help me understand those two conflicting statements (as I know you aren't feeding me a line, it makes me sure I'm not understanding).

Posted by sadaraine on 2014-07-10 09:58:55

Youre so impressive Doc. My best to you and thank you for material so unlike other garbage journalism we can barely escape in this free country daily.

Posted by Joshua Graham on 2014-07-10 01:32:34

I use http://hempmedspx.com/, which I've found to be consistent, well made and thoroughly lab tested. As far as dosage, I recommend that someone with a level of pain already start with 1 drop, under the tongue, 3x per day. You can then increase the dose until you're experiencing comfort. At that point, stay on the same dose for 1 month. You can experiment again at that point - I found that I could obtain the same relief with a smaller dose by then. Everyone's different, and factors including body weight (larger people often need a higher dose) and metabolism. Faster metabolisms might process the substance faster. They might also burn through it faster. You have to work with it, but since it's incredibly safe, feel free.

The company offers discounts after the first order, so with delivery it's been about $160 per bottle for a 2 oz bottle with 500 mg of CBD. That lasts me 3 months, so I look at it as a 53 dollar copay, once a month.

It makes more sense from an argumentative perspective to focus on the medical side of cannabis but what strikes me about this issue is how anti-cannabis attitudes were formed initially. Much of the public has credulously accepted the results of some questionable Congressional hearings. Attitudes since then are mostly a continuation of that dubious origin.

I'll try to locate some of the passages from something I read long ago, but I'll leave the following article until then.

Hey, Doc. Thanks for the article. As always, great work. I had a couple of questions regarding your use of CBD.

First, I was curious of the brand you use or if is acquired through your doctor and what the going rate of the actual legitimate oil is (I'm loathe to trust things like amazon and other searches without knowing what I'm actually getting into).

Second, I was curious about dosage with regards to efficacy of its use.

I ask not only because this intrigues me but it would be quite useful given the nature of work that I do as a tradesman with rigorous physical demands. I rarely use Aspirins or other pills of those types for the reasons you've listed (And just about any other pill or drug for that matter)

As an individual whose wild days are behind me I'm not looking for things that will alter psyche or damage my liver, aside from the occasional beer (since I doubt anybody would trust a blue collar stiff like me that doesn't cuss or drink at all.)

Anyways, any leads would be useful and if any of the information is sensitive I do not require an answer.

Thanks again for the great work you do and all the best in your own treatment!

Posted by The_Operative on 2014-07-09 21:20:31

No,l as far as I've been able to find They're looking for THC metabolites, and CBD has essentially (less than 1% THC) none. However - as I said in the article, I'm going to want that gold-plated before anyone with a job testing issue should ask the company that sells the product.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 19:47:44

Political allegiance, belief in half-truths, belief in many of the churches that preach that it's evil and the absurd idea that keeping 'drugs' illegal is a good idea. The amount of bad info and bad research that's been published - and continues to be, in many cases - is also problematic.

Germany did what was hailed as a seminal study about cannabis and schizophrenia in children. But they chose only children who had serious behavior and antisocial problems before using cannabis, and who were no screened for schizophrenia during that time. Their 'conclusion' was that cannabis caused schizophrenia in children and young adults. It's the bais for many of the claims on cannabis and youths.

As I've stated - no young person should use substances that affect consciousness. Many unstable adults have actually improved when using cannabis, though, and it's been used effectively to treat depression. You can and shouldn't overuse it and some folks should avoid it. A small percentage of individuals while have unusual reactions to it - usually allergies. The reality, though, is that the numbers are low for any medication and it's level of toxicity is below that of anything but water.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 19:33:13

It is incredibly challenging to undo the damage that decades of misinformation ("Reefer Madness!") and social taboo have done to the perception of marijuana. Why do people want so badly to believe that the substance is more harmful than it actually is?

Posted by SterlingMalloryArcher on 2014-07-09 19:09:52

I'm curious about that as well. Urinalysis for marijuana is a test for "cannabinoids," as I understand it, and I would guess that includes CBD, but I'm not a doctor or pharmacist.

Posted by SterlingMalloryArcher on 2014-07-09 19:05:52

DK, it's a hot topic. Most of the earliest research that I have was performed under sub-optimal circumstances. It was designed to show cannabis to be a non-issue in such situations, and unsurprisingly, that's what it showed, The anti-cannabis lobby aren't the only ones who create and use shaky research.

This remains one of the unsolved aspects of cannabis use and research. My personal approach is that i never drive or operate machinery (among other things) when I need to use THC as medicine. There are several promising new research projects that should deal with this, and as soon as they're published, I'll report the findings.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 19:01:38

VL, thanks for your perspective. If you use the term 'addition', you're using a pretty specific bio-medical term. It is literally impossible, on that basis, to form an addition to cannabis.

There are side effects with some people, and some should not use it. To me, that doesn't change the reality that much - most - of the information on the supposed dangers of the plant are half-truths (such as addiction, when 'habit' is what is really meant) and inaccuracies that are based on research that no one seems able to replicate.

I appreciate that there are many people with differing views on this, but my own is that I will continue to base my own on peer-reviewed research and clinical experience. If it changes, so will I. I'd only ask that you question what you've been told and follow whatever you conclude.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 18:57:15

Doc, there is no doubt that there are medical uses for marijuana and marijuana derivatives. However what you wrote about addiction, especially in regards to marijuana, is not accurate. That doesn't negate that there are valid medical uses for marijuana, but addiction and side effects are also a reality.

Posted by ValueLiberty on 2014-07-09 18:29:23

This is remarkably interesting news. I'm a master electrician in my early 50s. The economy forced me to accept working in the Colorado prison system. I'm a life long jock and blue collar worker. When workers - and athletes, for that matter - reach their 40s, the fact of not being bullet proof slowly sets in. By the time the 50s roll around, every boo boo from trying to be superman comes back to bring a reminder. Many workers end up with opioid addictions due to the toll taken on their bodies from simply earning a living. The toll taken on my own body has become a huge part of my life in recent years.

There was a saying that "a couple of ibuprofen and a good stiff drink will cure most of what ails you". The problem is, I've seen the results of intestinal bleeding in a few friends who lived by that principle. It's abundantly clear as to the results of relying on opioids. I've recently been prescribed tramadol for shoulder joints with more miles on them than my old 1970 Nova. I'm just not a fan of the weird hangover in the morning, and it does nothing to stop waking up every 2 hours to adjust my body position at night. Many like me would gladly welcome anything to help us keep moving as we drudge toward retirement. CBD might be something to help, with less side effects than traditional analgesics. Mmj would be awesome, but will more than likely not be accepted in my lifetime. The problem is that urinalysis is driven by the insurance industry. Until a reliable test that can tell if consumption of cannabis was in the last couple of hours as opposed to 30 or so days, it will never be allowed in any way for most blue collar or safety related industry workers.My question (after a long winded comment) is, does CBD show up in a urinalysis the same as cannabis?

Posted by jayrockstone on 2014-07-09 18:26:16

Doc: As an individual, I am all in favor of legalizing pot etc for all the reasons you state and more. As an employer and chatting with the past/present Chairs of the Chamber, the challenge has been, as I understand it, is the lack of research and understanding of what blood levels lead to impairment in the workplace and how to reliably test - especially for mission critical and healthcare jobs. As a result, Colorado employers and the NFL have all or nothing standards. People are losing their jobs for positive tests. How high is someone the next day after using heaven knows what THC levels in variable products. We have standards for blood alcohol and folks get DUI's driving to work the day after a night out thinking they are clear. We know 2 or 3 drinks in a short time and no one should drive - there are no comparatives for consumers of pot. So, how does residual THC affect work performance or football skills as well - in training or in games? I'd like to learn more...

Posted by denverkewl on 2014-07-09 17:58:29

Thanks, Hank. I haven't read it as of yet but I wanted to draw attention to yet another resource -- the Shaffer Drug Library.

I'll comment about the strange history of cannabis legislation later but I wanted to post this for now.

Posted by colinski2 on 2014-07-09 17:22:28

Neither did I, Doc P. Strange - you'd think they were flocking to ERs from some of the coverage. Yet, I can't find an ER doc who's seen such a case.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 16:46:38

Hire ninjas to take care of Goodell? Seriously - I'm not a big politics guy, and I suspect that this one will be highly political. How they work it out will be something to watch. I will do so and report as it unfolds.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 16:42:03

In 32 years of running critical care units I have a daily census of drug addicts and alcoholics, but have never seen anyone admitted with a marijuana related issue.

Posted by DocPonderosa on 2014-07-09 16:34:53

Nice football pharmacology! Thanks Doc!

Posted by DocPonderosa on 2014-07-09 16:31:35

Nice job Doc! - thanks for passing along the peer-reviewed data/facts. I'm guessing the NFL owners (and Goodell) will insist that this be "negotiated" thru the rather ineffective NFLPA rather than any one team or the NFL unilaterally doing the right thing. Any thoughts on how the players might accelerate this process?

Posted by SteveS on 2014-07-09 16:31:07

None, Steve, and none are expected. CBD have no effects on consciousness.

In good conscience, I have to note something. The research on the supposed link between cannabis and mental health has been shamelessly overstated by the anti-cannabis crowd. Please know that I spent a few years in the drug and alcohol detox field, so this isn't coming from someone unfamiliar with the research.

It doesn't cause depression. It doesn't cause schizophrenia. It is NOT addictive. It can be habit forming in the sense that my daily dose of herb tea is - if I don't get it, I notice. There are zero receptors in the brain that would accept the THC or CBD molecules to produce such a circumstance.

The sole exception is growing brains. Until a child is at least 18-21 years of age, any affective substance should be avoided. It's common sense and basic medicine. After that, however, the evidence that claims mental health issues with cannabis is sketchy, often impossible to reproduce and overall, quite shoddy.

What we do know is that using too much cannabis can affect short term memory and one's ability to focus. That can be eliminated by either going off cannabis for a while or by taking CBD, which is a C-1 antagonist and remedies the issue.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 16:06:46

Interesting article Doc. I would be interesting to hear if there have been any links with CBD and mental health problems given the links between prolonged cannabis use and mental health problems.

Posted by Steve Williams on 2014-07-09 15:45:15

Consider it done.

Posted by bradley on 2014-07-09 15:32:39

Please do. I've posted it on Facebook, it's going on Twitter in a few minutes and yes, I'd like anyone to know that they have options for themselves or their family. Please post or link to it if you're drawn to do so.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 15:18:56

Doc - do you mind any of us sending the link to this to friends?Really, this should go viral.

Posted by bradley on 2014-07-09 15:07:41

I liked the family from TX and the dad had a Bronco hat on. So, not only are the CBD's helping people who truly need it, it may just be converting some people into Bronco fans. Looks like a win-win to me. :-)

Posted by Sparks on 2014-07-09 14:35:15

It's good to hear that you've found a medication to help what sounds like an unpleasant disorder to experience. Personally, I've always been in favor of legalizing marijuana (Both recreationally and medically). To me, I just don't see any reason that it should have been made illegal in the first place and I don't like stripping away people's liberties unless there is a good reason to.

Furthermore, I know that my grandpa's death was significantly less painful because of marijuana and I'm glad that he had that option. I know many people who responsibly use marijuana and I support their right to use it as well. Personally, I don't enjoy the sensation of being high in the least and don't use marijuana, but if I had a medical condition that would be improved by the use of CBD's, I'd definitely look into that.

Thank you for sharing this. I think that as people are getting more and more educated, they're starting to realize that it's kind of ridiculous that marijuana is illegal.

It is my personal view that all drugs should be legalized and that we treat addiction as a medical issue and stop locking users up in prison for extended sentences. But, the decriminalization of marijuana is a nice place to start.

Posted by DragonPie on 2014-07-09 14:18:49

I was glad to be able to report that people don't have to move to get CBD/hemp oil any longer. It's now legal in every state in the union, as well as internationally. It's been a huge step, finally making this therapy available to all.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 14:09:48

I watched the video of Andrew and his family. How anybody can look at that family and want to deny them help is beyond my comprehension. I just wanted to provide a few more details.

Posted by Yahmule on 2014-07-09 14:05:52

Thanks - I did mention this in the article, but it deserves to get more attention. Going from 300 seizures a week down to 3 or 4 a year means that the children with Dravets can live much longer, healthier and productive lives.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 14:00:36

Your comments on this subject are always enlightening and educational, Doc. Thank you for your continued examination of the topic. Marijuana oil is helping countless children with epileptic conditions who are relocating to Colorado. "Charlotte's Web," a strain that relieved a young girl who was experiencing hundreds of seizures a day and was eventually named after her, is highlighted in the video below.

It should be noted that the federal government has deliberately and systematically dragged their feet on research into the benefits of cannabis.

Thanks for adding that link - it's a good one. I'd recommend it to anyone. From it:

"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that more Americans now die from painkillers than from heroin and cocaine combined. The recent uptick in heroin use around the country has been closely linked to the availability of prescription opioids, which give their users a similar high and can trigger a heroin craving in recovering addicts. (Notably, there are no known deaths related to marijuana, although there have been instances of impaired driving.)"

Posted by Doc Bear on 2014-07-09 13:37:37

Interesting stuff, Doc. Thanks.

As a pure coincidence I was reading the following article last night about the illegality of marijuana and opioids.

Very interesting article Doc. It's very encouraging news that you are being helped so noticeably. I've read that part of the article 3 times now. I'll be saving this info for myself and others I know. Prayers and best wishes to you.